Author Topic: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO  (Read 24348 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,978
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #135 on: December 17, 2011, 05:33:12 PM »
Quote
So images are only holy, if they follow eastern cultural standards. Got it.

Wrong. Images are holy if they proclaim and express what the Orthodox Church teaches. Have I not made this point often enough in so many of my posts on this forum?

You mean the Orthodox Church actually has a definite teaching on anything? I'm shocked.
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Ortho_cat

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 5,392
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #136 on: December 18, 2011, 03:10:41 AM »
Quote
So images are only holy, if they follow eastern cultural standards. Got it.

Wrong. Images are holy if they proclaim and express what the Orthodox Church teaches. Have I not made this point often enough in so many of my posts on this forum?

You mean the Orthodox Church actually has a definite teaching on anything? I'm shocked.

hardy har har...

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,907
  • Torn apaaaht
  • Faith: Semi-Evangelical
  • Jurisdiction: Might become Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #137 on: December 18, 2011, 04:20:20 AM »
I guess if the 1917 icon of the Theotokos enthroned can be miraculously created by God as a non canonical icon, then so can the Virgen de Guadalupe. He makes the rules, He can break them if He wants to.

So we could say the Virgen de Guadalupe is a specific type of icon all its own and its features are not to be transferred to other icons. It quite simply is what it is.
Every day we should hear at least one little song, read one good poem, see one exquisite picture, and, if possible, speak a few sensible words. -Goethe

I once heard a monk say, “The person of prayer does not need to go any further than his own heart to find the source of all violence in the world.” -Fr. Stephen Freeman

Offline Alpo

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,423
  • My borcht recipe is better than your borcht recipe
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Bulgaria
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #138 on: December 18, 2011, 05:56:14 AM »
Wrong emphasis. It's Eastern Orthodox, not Eastern Orthodox.

QFT. Also, thank you for new Faith status. :police:

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,299
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #139 on: December 18, 2011, 10:29:00 AM »
I guess if the 1917 icon of the Theotokos enthroned can be miraculously created by God as a non canonical icon, then so can the Virgen de Guadalupe. He makes the rules, He can break them if He wants to.

So we could say the Virgen de Guadalupe is a specific type of icon all its own and its features are not to be transferred to other icons. It quite simply is what it is.

False analogy. The Derzhavnaya which Irish Hermit referred to was an old, existing icon painted a good century or more before its rediscovery in 1917. Olifa, the traditional oil varnish used for icons, darkens with time, the darkening accelerating in the presence of soot and vapor given off by oil lamps and candlAfter about 50 years, the appearance is usually still recognizable, but noticeably darkened. After a century or two, many icons are almost black. It was common practice for blackened icons to be repainted over the top of the existing image; the new icon may or may not have borne the same subject matter as the original. Repeated overpaintings were common, so that a board which might have been painted in, say, the 16th century, might have been repainted three or four times by the twentieth century.

The time of the painting of the Derzhavnaya coincided with the height of the naturalistic, Synodal/Academic style which had all but obliterated traditional iconography. It is what it is, and I have never said that it is, in itself, uncanonical (there are many variants of the Mother of God Enthroned type), though the motif of God the Father in it is still problematic. However, it seems that God chose to use this imperfect vessel at that particular point in time to manifest His presence.

OTOH, the Guadalupe image remains outside Orthodox tradition. It never was part of it, and is highly unlikely it ever will be. This status has nothing at all to do with "Eastern culture". I make no apologies for saying this.
No longer posting here. Anyone is welcome to PM me or email me at the address in my profile.

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,907
  • Torn apaaaht
  • Faith: Semi-Evangelical
  • Jurisdiction: Might become Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #140 on: December 19, 2011, 12:47:22 AM »
Wrong emphasis. It's Eastern Orthodox, not Eastern Orthodox.

QFT. Also, thank you for new Faith status. :police:
Thanks  :)
Every day we should hear at least one little song, read one good poem, see one exquisite picture, and, if possible, speak a few sensible words. -Goethe

I once heard a monk say, “The person of prayer does not need to go any further than his own heart to find the source of all violence in the world.” -Fr. Stephen Freeman

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,907
  • Torn apaaaht
  • Faith: Semi-Evangelical
  • Jurisdiction: Might become Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #141 on: December 19, 2011, 12:48:53 AM »
I guess if the 1917 icon of the Theotokos enthroned can be miraculously created by God as a non canonical icon, then so can the Virgen de Guadalupe. He makes the rules, He can break them if He wants to.

So we could say the Virgen de Guadalupe is a specific type of icon all its own and its features are not to be transferred to other icons. It quite simply is what it is.

False analogy. The Derzhavnaya which Irish Hermit referred to was an old, existing icon painted a good century or more before its rediscovery in 1917. Olifa, the traditional oil varnish used for icons, darkens with time, the darkening accelerating in the presence of soot and vapor given off by oil lamps and candlAfter about 50 years, the appearance is usually still recognizable, but noticeably darkened. After a century or two, many icons are almost black. It was common practice for blackened icons to be repainted over the top of the existing image; the new icon may or may not have borne the same subject matter as the original. Repeated overpaintings were common, so that a board which might have been painted in, say, the 16th century, might have been repainted three or four times by the twentieth century.

The time of the painting of the Derzhavnaya coincided with the height of the naturalistic, Synodal/Academic style which had all but obliterated traditional iconography. It is what it is, and I have never said that it is, in itself, uncanonical (there are many variants of the Mother of God Enthroned type), though the motif of God the Father in it is still problematic. However, it seems that God chose to use this imperfect vessel at that particular point in time to manifest His presence.

OTOH, the Guadalupe image remains outside Orthodox tradition. It never was part of it, and is highly unlikely it ever will be. This status has nothing at all to do with "Eastern culture". I make no apologies for saying this.
Oh ok. I was under the impression it was an icon made with hands.
Every day we should hear at least one little song, read one good poem, see one exquisite picture, and, if possible, speak a few sensible words. -Goethe

I once heard a monk say, “The person of prayer does not need to go any further than his own heart to find the source of all violence in the world.” -Fr. Stephen Freeman

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,299
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #142 on: December 19, 2011, 07:42:07 AM »
Quote
Oh ok. I was under the impression it was an icon made with hands.

Just to clarify: The Derzhavnaya was indeed originally painted, not "not made by hands" as a few have been. It then went "missing" and was forgotten about some time later, to be rediscovered in 1917 through the efforts of the woman Evdokia, where it was cleaned to reveal the image under the darkening.
No longer posting here. Anyone is welcome to PM me or email me at the address in my profile.

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,907
  • Torn apaaaht
  • Faith: Semi-Evangelical
  • Jurisdiction: Might become Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #143 on: December 19, 2011, 10:27:11 AM »
Quote
Oh ok. I was under the impression it was an icon made with hands.

Just to clarify: The Derzhavnaya was indeed originally painted, not "not made by hands" as a few have been. It then went "missing" and was forgotten about some time later, to be rediscovered in 1917 through the efforts of the woman Evdokia, where it was cleaned to reveal the image under the darkening.
Ooops, typo. My post should have read, "not made by hands."
Every day we should hear at least one little song, read one good poem, see one exquisite picture, and, if possible, speak a few sensible words. -Goethe

I once heard a monk say, “The person of prayer does not need to go any further than his own heart to find the source of all violence in the world.” -Fr. Stephen Freeman

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,907
  • Torn apaaaht
  • Faith: Semi-Evangelical
  • Jurisdiction: Might become Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #144 on: December 22, 2011, 01:29:52 AM »
So, going back to Deacon Lance's point vis a vis Acts 10:5 in post #102, if God works genuine miracles via the Virgen de Guadalupe (or even a non-canonical Orthodox icon such as the Sitka Mother of God) why doesn't this sanctify the previous errors in the composition and origin?
« Last Edit: December 22, 2011, 01:30:16 AM by Volnutt »
Every day we should hear at least one little song, read one good poem, see one exquisite picture, and, if possible, speak a few sensible words. -Goethe

I once heard a monk say, “The person of prayer does not need to go any further than his own heart to find the source of all violence in the world.” -Fr. Stephen Freeman

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,978
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #145 on: December 22, 2011, 12:27:41 PM »
So, going back to Deacon Lance's point vis a vis Acts 10:5 in post #102, if God works genuine miracles via the Virgen de Guadalupe (or even a non-canonical Orthodox icon such as the Sitka Mother of God) why doesn't this sanctify the previous errors in the composition and origin?

If the grace of God operates through non-Orthodox things, people, and churches, it does so in spite of the errors. Error cannot be sanctified. You can't call what is wrong right just because good happened through what was wrong. If someone comes to such a state of repentance after committing murder, for example, so that he works miracles, it does not mean that the murder was good or a right thing.
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Schultz

  • Christian. Guitarist. Scooterist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,538
  • Scion of the McKeesport Becks.
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #146 on: December 22, 2011, 12:30:20 PM »
So, going back to Deacon Lance's point vis a vis Acts 10:5 in post #102, if God works genuine miracles via the Virgen de Guadalupe (or even a non-canonical Orthodox icon such as the Sitka Mother of God) why doesn't this sanctify the previous errors in the composition and origin?

If the grace of God operates through non-Orthodox things, people, and churches, it does so in spite of the errors. Error cannot be sanctified. You can't call what is wrong right just because good happened through what was wrong. If someone comes to such a state of repentance after committing murder, for example, so that he works miracles, it does not mean that the murder was good or a right thing.

I think your analogy here is quite flawed, but I'll let those who have a stake in this elaborate.  Suffice to say, comparing the Sitka Mother of God to a repentant murderer is a stretch, to say the least.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2011, 12:30:37 PM by Schultz »
"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,978
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #147 on: December 22, 2011, 12:36:50 PM »
So, going back to Deacon Lance's point vis a vis Acts 10:5 in post #102, if God works genuine miracles via the Virgen de Guadalupe (or even a non-canonical Orthodox icon such as the Sitka Mother of God) why doesn't this sanctify the previous errors in the composition and origin?

If the grace of God operates through non-Orthodox things, people, and churches, it does so in spite of the errors. Error cannot be sanctified. You can't call what is wrong right just because good happened through what was wrong. If someone comes to such a state of repentance after committing murder, for example, so that he works miracles, it does not mean that the murder was good or a right thing.

I think your analogy here is quite flawed, but I'll let those who have a stake in this elaborate.  Suffice to say, comparing the Sitka Mother of God to a repentant murderer is a stretch, to say the least.

You misunderstand me. The previous poster mentioned Sitka. I have no problem at all with that icon. I was referring to Guadalupe, and in general, to the other churches and their miracles, etc, and grace. Reread.
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,907
  • Torn apaaaht
  • Faith: Semi-Evangelical
  • Jurisdiction: Might become Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #148 on: December 22, 2011, 12:59:30 PM »
I still think it's a stretch to equate the Virgin of Guadalupe with an ex-murderer, but mostly I was asking in relation to Acts 10:5. "What God has cleansed, do not call common."
Every day we should hear at least one little song, read one good poem, see one exquisite picture, and, if possible, speak a few sensible words. -Goethe

I once heard a monk say, “The person of prayer does not need to go any further than his own heart to find the source of all violence in the world.” -Fr. Stephen Freeman

Offline Schultz

  • Christian. Guitarist. Scooterist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,538
  • Scion of the McKeesport Becks.
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #149 on: December 22, 2011, 01:05:35 PM »
So, going back to Deacon Lance's point vis a vis Acts 10:5 in post #102, if God works genuine miracles via the Virgen de Guadalupe (or even a non-canonical Orthodox icon such as the Sitka Mother of God) why doesn't this sanctify the previous errors in the composition and origin?

If the grace of God operates through non-Orthodox things, people, and churches, it does so in spite of the errors. Error cannot be sanctified. You can't call what is wrong right just because good happened through what was wrong. If someone comes to such a state of repentance after committing murder, for example, so that he works miracles, it does not mean that the murder was good or a right thing.

I think your analogy here is quite flawed, but I'll let those who have a stake in this elaborate.  Suffice to say, comparing the Sitka Mother of God to a repentant murderer is a stretch, to say the least.

You misunderstand me. The previous poster mentioned Sitka. I have no problem at all with that icon. I was referring to Guadalupe, and in general, to the other churches and their miracles, etc, and grace. Reread.

YOU may not have a problem with it, but it is clearly an erroneous, non-canonical icon.  It is therefore de facto "non-Orthodox".
"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,978
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #150 on: December 22, 2011, 01:26:30 PM »
I still think it's a stretch to equate the Virgin of Guadalupe with an ex-murderer, but mostly I was asking in relation to Acts 10:5. "What God has cleansed, do not call common."

Ugh. I was talking about the grace of God, and ways that it works through things sometimes in spite of problems.
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,907
  • Torn apaaaht
  • Faith: Semi-Evangelical
  • Jurisdiction: Might become Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #151 on: December 23, 2011, 02:39:29 AM »
I'm sorry if I offended. I just found the comparison repugnant in it's extremity.
Every day we should hear at least one little song, read one good poem, see one exquisite picture, and, if possible, speak a few sensible words. -Goethe

I once heard a monk say, “The person of prayer does not need to go any further than his own heart to find the source of all violence in the world.” -Fr. Stephen Freeman

Offline HabteSelassie

  • Ises and I-ity
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,332
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #152 on: December 23, 2011, 06:17:03 PM »
Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!


If the grace of God operates through non-Orthodox things, people, and churches, it does so in spite of the errors. Error cannot be sanctified. You can't call what is wrong right just because good happened through what was wrong. If someone comes to such a state of repentance after committing murder, for example, so that he works miracles, it does not mean that the murder was good or a right thing.

+1000

Post of the Month!

This is the exact same point I was trying to make in regards to Orthodox Sacramental Marriage vs Evangelical Symbolic Marriage and the capital "G" Grace of God :)

stay blessed,
habte selassie
"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,978
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #153 on: December 23, 2011, 07:10:13 PM »
I'm sorry if I offended. I just found the comparison repugnant in it's extremity.

I wasn't trying to be extreme, sorry. I was merely trying to say how something which is mistaken and imperfect can be a vehicle for grace, but it doesn't mean that thing is no longer mistaken or imperfect.
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,907
  • Torn apaaaht
  • Faith: Semi-Evangelical
  • Jurisdiction: Might become Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #154 on: December 23, 2011, 09:14:28 PM »
Ok. No problem.

Deacon Lance, LBK? What do you guys think?
Every day we should hear at least one little song, read one good poem, see one exquisite picture, and, if possible, speak a few sensible words. -Goethe

I once heard a monk say, “The person of prayer does not need to go any further than his own heart to find the source of all violence in the world.” -Fr. Stephen Freeman

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,299
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #155 on: December 23, 2011, 11:04:17 PM »
Shanghaiski summed it up pretty well.
No longer posting here. Anyone is welcome to PM me or email me at the address in my profile.

Offline Deacon Lance

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,238
  • Faith: Byzantine Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #156 on: December 24, 2011, 12:06:25 AM »
He is exactly right.  Error can't be sanctified.  So if an Icon is sanctified it must not be an error.  The error is with  man-made rules denying grace where it is found.
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,299
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #157 on: December 24, 2011, 03:07:32 AM »
This is what Shanghaiski wrote:

Quote
I was merely trying to say how something which is mistaken and imperfect can be a vehicle for grace, but it doesn't mean that thing is no longer mistaken or imperfect.

This is what Deacon Lance wrote in response to it:
Quote
He is exactly right.  Error can't be sanctified.  So if an Icon is sanctified it must not be an error.  The error is with  man-made rules denying grace where it is found.

For the life of me, I can't understand how the latter draws such a conclusion from the former.  ??? ???
No longer posting here. Anyone is welcome to PM me or email me at the address in my profile.

Offline Sleeper

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,290
  • On hiatus for the foreseeable future.
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #158 on: December 24, 2011, 06:08:56 PM »
Deacon Lance is saying if something is sanctified, it obviously is error-free, since error cannot be sanctified. Where one chooses to deny a miracle or grace in something due to man-made rules, the problem is with that person, not the thing they reject.

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,907
  • Torn apaaaht
  • Faith: Semi-Evangelical
  • Jurisdiction: Might become Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #159 on: December 24, 2011, 06:33:29 PM »
Who here is denying the miracles? All she is saying is that miracles and grace working through something don't mean the thing is sanctified.

Deacon Lance and I came to an impasse on this with my point about the brass serpent. I'm still thinking about his point. Kind of hard to carry on a conversation if we're just assuming the Virgen de Guadalupe was, in fact, made without hands...
Every day we should hear at least one little song, read one good poem, see one exquisite picture, and, if possible, speak a few sensible words. -Goethe

I once heard a monk say, “The person of prayer does not need to go any further than his own heart to find the source of all violence in the world.” -Fr. Stephen Freeman

Offline ChristusDominus

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 936
  • Saint Aloysius Gonzaga
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #160 on: December 24, 2011, 09:30:18 PM »
This is what Shanghaiski wrote:

Quote
I was merely trying to say how something which is mistaken and imperfect can be a vehicle for grace, but it doesn't mean that thing is no longer mistaken or imperfect.

This is what Deacon Lance wrote in response to it:
Quote
He is exactly right.  Error can't be sanctified.  So if an Icon is sanctified it must not be an error.  The error is with  man-made rules denying grace where it is found.

For the life of me, I can't understand how the latter draws such a conclusion from the former.  ??? ???
It would've been so much easier had LBK been present when the Madonna transferred her image onto St.Juan Diego's tilma to ensure she did so according to "Orthodox" guidelines.  ::)
« Last Edit: December 24, 2011, 09:37:08 PM by ChristusDominus »
There is no more evident sign that anyone is a saint and of the number of the elect, than to see him leading a good life and at the same time a prey to desolation, suffering, and trials. - Saint Aloysius Gonzaga

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,934
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #161 on: December 24, 2011, 09:55:11 PM »
This is what Shanghaiski wrote:

Quote
I was merely trying to say how something which is mistaken and imperfect can be a vehicle for grace, but it doesn't mean that thing is no longer mistaken or imperfect.

This is what Deacon Lance wrote in response to it:
Quote
He is exactly right.  Error can't be sanctified.  So if an Icon is sanctified it must not be an error.  The error is with  man-made rules denying grace where it is found.

For the life of me, I can't understand how the latter draws such a conclusion from the former.  ??? ???
It would've been so much easier had LBK been present when the Madonna transferred her image onto St.Juan Diego's tilma to ensure she did so according to "Orthodox" guidelines.  ::)
That does assUme that she did so.
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,907
  • Torn apaaaht
  • Faith: Semi-Evangelical
  • Jurisdiction: Might become Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #162 on: December 24, 2011, 10:43:06 PM »
Indeed.
Every day we should hear at least one little song, read one good poem, see one exquisite picture, and, if possible, speak a few sensible words. -Goethe

I once heard a monk say, “The person of prayer does not need to go any further than his own heart to find the source of all violence in the world.” -Fr. Stephen Freeman

Offline Deacon Lance

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,238
  • Faith: Byzantine Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #163 on: December 25, 2011, 09:24:16 PM »
I realize some, perhaps most, do not accept that the Virgin of Guadalupe is an icon not made by hands as I do but the point applies equally to miraculous Icons that do not follow the medieval Russian rules.
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Avowed denominationalist
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,375
  • Nepsis or Sepsis™
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian+Greek
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #164 on: December 25, 2011, 11:23:05 PM »
(or even a non-canonical Orthodox icon such as the Sitka Mother of God)
What canon?
Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

Πάντα μὲν καθαρὰ τοῖς καθαροῖς
Τοῖς δὲ μεμιασμένοις καὶ ἀπίστοις οὐδὲν καθαρόν

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,907
  • Torn apaaaht
  • Faith: Semi-Evangelical
  • Jurisdiction: Might become Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #165 on: December 26, 2011, 12:06:18 AM »
(or even a non-canonical Orthodox icon such as the Sitka Mother of God)
What canon?
It shows God the Father.
Every day we should hear at least one little song, read one good poem, see one exquisite picture, and, if possible, speak a few sensible words. -Goethe

I once heard a monk say, “The person of prayer does not need to go any further than his own heart to find the source of all violence in the world.” -Fr. Stephen Freeman

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Avowed denominationalist
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,375
  • Nepsis or Sepsis™
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian+Greek
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #166 on: December 26, 2011, 12:35:59 AM »
(or even a non-canonical Orthodox icon such as the Sitka Mother of God)
What canon?
It shows God the Father.
What canon forbids it?
Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

Πάντα μὲν καθαρὰ τοῖς καθαροῖς
Τοῖς δὲ μεμιασμένοις καὶ ἀπίστοις οὐδὲν καθαρόν

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,907
  • Torn apaaaht
  • Faith: Semi-Evangelical
  • Jurisdiction: Might become Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #167 on: December 26, 2011, 01:08:00 AM »
The 1666 Council of the Hundred Chapters, either canon 2 or 3.
Every day we should hear at least one little song, read one good poem, see one exquisite picture, and, if possible, speak a few sensible words. -Goethe

I once heard a monk say, “The person of prayer does not need to go any further than his own heart to find the source of all violence in the world.” -Fr. Stephen Freeman

Offline William

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,354
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #168 on: December 26, 2011, 01:14:43 AM »
The 1666 Council of the Hundred Chapters, either canon 2 or 3.

Are these ecumenical canons?
Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,907
  • Torn apaaaht
  • Faith: Semi-Evangelical
  • Jurisdiction: Might become Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #169 on: December 26, 2011, 03:15:01 AM »
No, but I believe they're widely accepted.
Every day we should hear at least one little song, read one good poem, see one exquisite picture, and, if possible, speak a few sensible words. -Goethe

I once heard a monk say, “The person of prayer does not need to go any further than his own heart to find the source of all violence in the world.” -Fr. Stephen Freeman

Offline Iconodule

  • Uranopolitan
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,453
  • "My god is greater."
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #170 on: December 29, 2011, 11:29:53 PM »
No, but I believe they're widely accepted.

The main purpose of the 1666 council was condemning the Old Rite. Since the Old Rite is once again approved I'd say the legitimacy of the council in general is doubtful. With the politically motivated deposition of Patriarch Nikon, this council also represents an unwelcome incursion of the Moscow state into the life of the Church which bore much evil fruit in subsequent centuries.

If the canons were really so universally received then it's a wonder that no one enforces them.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2011, 11:38:08 PM by Iconodule »

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,299
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #171 on: December 30, 2011, 09:00:01 AM »
No, but I believe they're widely accepted.

The main purpose of the 1666 council was condemning the Old Rite. Since the Old Rite is once again approved I'd say the legitimacy of the council in general is doubtful. With the politically motivated deposition of Patriarch Nikon, this council also represents an unwelcome incursion of the Moscow state into the life of the Church which bore much evil fruit in subsequent centuries.

If the canons were really so universally received then it's a wonder that no one enforces them.

You are forgetting the many patristic denunciations and condemnations of depicting God the Father in icons in the centuries before the 1666 Russian council. St John of Damascus is particularly blunt in this condemnation, as is, IIRC, St Theodore of the Studion. Both are rightly pillars of the defense of icons against the iconoclast heresy. These are but two saints who held this view, there are many others. Some food for thought:

Of old, God the incorporeal and uncircumscribed was not depicted at all. But now that God has appeared in the flesh and lived among men, I make an image of the God who can be seen. I do not worship matter, but I worship the Creator of matter, who for my sake became material and deigned to dwell in matter, who through matter effected my salvation. I will not cease from venerating the matter through which my salvation has been effected. (St John of Damascus)

No one could describe the Word of the Father; but when He took flesh from you, O Mother of God, He consented to be described, and restored the fallen image to its former state by uniting it to divine beauty. We confess and proclaim our salvation in word and images.(kontakion for the Sunday of Orthodoxy)

The kontakion is particularly pertinent: Has God the Father consented to be described? Has God the Father revealed Himself in any visible, tangible form? Only as a voice from heaven, at the baptism of Christ, and at Christ's Transfiguration. Can a voice be seen? Can it be depicted pictorially? No, it cannot. And He has certainly never manifested Himself as a bearded old man.
No longer posting here. Anyone is welcome to PM me or email me at the address in my profile.

Offline Iconodule

  • Uranopolitan
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,453
  • "My god is greater."
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #172 on: December 30, 2011, 09:23:37 AM »
No, but I believe they're widely accepted.

The main purpose of the 1666 council was condemning the Old Rite. Since the Old Rite is once again approved I'd say the legitimacy of the council in general is doubtful. With the politically motivated deposition of Patriarch Nikon, this council also represents an unwelcome incursion of the Moscow state into the life of the Church which bore much evil fruit in subsequent centuries.

If the canons were really so universally received then it's a wonder that no one enforces them.

You are forgetting the many patristic denunciations and condemnations of depicting God the Father in icons in the centuries before the 1666 Russian council. St John of Damascus is particularly blunt in this condemnation, as is, IIRC, St Theodore of the Studion. Both are rightly pillars of the defense of icons against the iconoclast heresy. These are but two saints who held this view, there are many others. Some food for thought:

Of old, God the incorporeal and uncircumscribed was not depicted at all. But now that God has appeared in the flesh and lived among men, I make an image of the God who can be seen. I do not worship matter, but I worship the Creator of matter, who for my sake became material and deigned to dwell in matter, who through matter effected my salvation. I will not cease from venerating the matter through which my salvation has been effected. (St John of Damascus)

No one could describe the Word of the Father; but when He took flesh from you, O Mother of God, He consented to be described, and restored the fallen image to its former state by uniting it to divine beauty. We confess and proclaim our salvation in word and images.(kontakion for the Sunday of Orthodoxy)

The kontakion is particularly pertinent: Has God the Father consented to be described? Has God the Father revealed Himself in any visible, tangible form? Only as a voice from heaven, at the baptism of Christ, and at Christ's Transfiguration. Can a voice be seen? Can it be depicted pictorially? No, it cannot. And He has certainly never manifested Himself as a bearded old man.

I agree that the depictions of God the Father are questionable, but citing the 1666 council against them is problematic and weakens the case.

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,299
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #173 on: December 30, 2011, 09:27:19 AM »
Quote
I agree that the depictions of God the Father are questionable, but citing the 1666 council against them is problematic and weakens the case.

Why is citing the canon from this council "problematic" and "weakening the case"? Is the canon inconsistent with patristic and liturgical precedent?
No longer posting here. Anyone is welcome to PM me or email me at the address in my profile.

Offline Iconodule

  • Uranopolitan
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,453
  • "My god is greater."
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #174 on: December 30, 2011, 09:29:35 AM »
Quote
I agree that the depictions of God the Father are questionable, but citing the 1666 council against them is problematic and weakens the case.

Why is citing the canon from this council "problematic" and "weakening the case"? Is the canon inconsistent with patristic and liturgical precedent?

If you invoke the canonical authority of the 1666 council, you imply that all of its rulings are legitimate. The council was really a disaster for the Russian church.

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,299
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #175 on: December 30, 2011, 09:44:15 AM »
Quote
I agree that the depictions of God the Father are questionable, but citing the 1666 council against them is problematic and weakens the case.

Why is citing the canon from this council "problematic" and "weakening the case"? Is the canon inconsistent with patristic and liturgical precedent?

If you invoke the canonical authority of the 1666 council, you imply that all of its rulings are legitimate. The council was really a disaster for the Russian church.

The rulings of this council not concerned with iconography are irrelevant to this discussion. The iconographic canon from that council is consistent with the clear and unequivocal testimony of the church. Or do you wish to argue otherwise?
No longer posting here. Anyone is welcome to PM me or email me at the address in my profile.

Offline Iconodule

  • Uranopolitan
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,453
  • "My god is greater."
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #176 on: December 30, 2011, 10:39:16 AM »
Quote
I agree that the depictions of God the Father are questionable, but citing the 1666 council against them is problematic and weakens the case.

Why is citing the canon from this council "problematic" and "weakening the case"? Is the canon inconsistent with patristic and liturgical precedent?

If you invoke the canonical authority of the 1666 council, you imply that all of its rulings are legitimate. The council was really a disaster for the Russian church.

The rulings of this council not concerned with iconography are irrelevant to this discussion.

Binding canons come from binding councils. If you don't think the council is binding then its canonical rulings are irrelevant, regardless of their consistency with tradition. 

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,978
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #177 on: December 31, 2011, 01:57:05 PM »
We recognize the canons or at least the sentiments of canons and writings from several councils of dubious validity or outright heresy. Several Arian councils, I understand, opposed not only Orthodoxy, but papal supremacy. We, of course, reject the heresy and take the Orthodoxy, because we know our faith, which is enshrined not only in the Ecumenical Councils, but in all the received gifts of holy tradition, in totality.
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Iconodule

  • Uranopolitan
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,453
  • "My god is greater."
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #178 on: December 31, 2011, 03:49:52 PM »
We recognize the canons or at least the sentiments of canons and writings from several councils of dubious validity or outright heresy. Several Arian councils, I understand, opposed not only Orthodoxy, but papal supremacy.

But do we cite these Arian councils in polemics against Papal supremacy?

Offline Justin Kissel

  • •|•|•
  • Protospatharios
  • ****************
  • Posts: 31,762
Re: Virgen de Guadalupe (and other appiritions) in WRO
« Reply #179 on: December 31, 2011, 04:04:24 PM »
Binding canons come from binding councils. If you don't think the council is binding then its canonical rulings are irrelevant, regardless of their consistency with tradition. 

Things aren't always that simple. Consider the Council of Antioch (341), which is a mess to figure out. It's canons are accepted, yet a condemnation of St. Athanasius might have happened there (or at least been issued a sizable number of the bishops from the council speaking in it's name).